Thursday, February 22, 2007

some of the m.s.m. now asking "is cheney next?"

[so many others have covered various
facets of the emerging-cheney-
fourth-branch-of-government-meme so
deftly, that i'll just offer a soft-
ball, right down the middle, here. . .]

justing rood, he of abc news' blog,
the blotter, interviewed a few
former independent counsels yesterday
about the prospect -- assuming, arguendo,
a conviction of scooter on at least a few
felony counts -- of fitz escalating/renewing
his investigation of the vice president. . .

rood's retelling of murray waas' retelling
of fitzs' re-reading (got that? good.)
of the grand jury testimony of cheney's involvement
in the jackson hole/"meat-grinder" note (see here),
on the very day scooter libby talked with
the cheney about not being the source
of the novak leak, is fascinating. and silly.

cheney, according to libby's sworn testimony
(for what that's worth!), reacted in a very
peculiar way when libby told cheney
libby thought he first learned of plame's
identity from tim russert.

cheney just cocked his head to the side,
and said no more. the clear implication
left by rood is that, if cheney
were interested in helping set the record
right, and straighten his little scooter out,
cheney would have said, "no, scooter, i told you."

that, cheney definitely did not do,
again, according to scooter's sworn testimony.

so, even then -- at the grand jury -- it seems
scooter was possibly preparing for the moment
when he'd have to admit that the tim russert plop
was a lie -- a lie told to cover for the man direct-
ing all the mis-information and agit-prop about
wilson/plame. a lie, once admitted as such,
that would possibly offer a path out of the
woods for scooter -- offering something of value
(in 30 pieces of silver parlance), to trade fitz,
if was convicted, and in dire need of leniency in
the sentencing recs from the d.o.j. / special counsel's

will it go down that way?

who knows.

but cheney owes the nation some answers,
whether scooter is convicted or acquitted.

ps: it seems a good sign for fitz that the
jury is taking its time with its deliberations.

No comments: